In attempting to force the release of Trump’s tax records to a House committee, there is a large competing interest in invasion of privacy by the government and the public’s right to know. The IRS may not release an individual’s or entities income tax returns without a valid reason, and those returns still cannot be shared beyond the requesting panel, so, what would this gain the Democrats?
Trump Says He Won’t Turn Over His Tax Returns. It’s Not Up To Him Anymore.
President Donald Trump said Wednesday that he doesn’t want to let Democrats see his tax returns once they assume control of the U.S. House of Representatives next year.
But that’s actually not up to the president ― according to the law, at least.
The leaders of key congressional committees can ask the IRS for anybody’s tax returns. Republicans simply did not want to do so. Democrats said in October that they would ask the IRS for Trump’s returns if they regained control of the House, which they did on Tuesday night. (snip)
Federal law gives congressional tax committees the power to obtain anyone’s tax returns. If the taxpayer doesn’t consent in writing, the committees still have the power to obtain the returns in a secret meeting.
In response to a written request, the law says, “the Secretary [of the Treasury] shall furnish such committee with any return or return information specified in such request.â€
Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin would review any such request with department lawyers “for legality,†according to a spokesperson.
When we are talking about that law, we need to dip down to (f) Disclosures to Committees of Congress, (3) “Any resolution described in this paragraph shall specify the purpose for which the return or return information is to be furnished and that such information cannot reasonably be obtained from any other sources.” In other words, there needs to be an actual, material reason to see the returns. It can’t be simply because they want to see them. Quora notes
The house and senate both have a subpoena power. This is expressed in the rules of each of body. Specifically in Senate Rule XXVI and House Rule XI . There are some definite restrictions in both rules. The subpoena has to be issued by majority vote of a committee, and according to Wilkinson v US it must meet three conditions to be “legally sufficientâ€:
- First, the committee investigation of the broad subject area must be authorized by its Chamber
- the investigation must pursue “a valid legislative purpose” but does not need to involve legislation and does not need to specify the ultimate intent of Congress
- the specific inquiries must be pertinent to the subject matter area that has been authorized for investigation
These rules apply to any subpoena. If a subpoena is made against the sitting executive, then issues of separation of powers will arise. These would likely play out by the executive asserting “executive privilegeâ€, which is the power claimed by the President and other members of the executive branch to resist certain subpoenas and other interventions by the legislative and judicial branches of government to access information and personnel relating to the executive branch.
Under what rationale would a Democrat run House committee/subcommittee deem these tax returns of a private citizen (that’s what he was at the time) necessary, rather than just a fishing expedition and/or an attempt to embarrass Mr. Trump?
If those things happens, then if a subpoena goes to Trump or the IRS it’s going to immediately be responded to with an “executive privilege†claim. To overcome that, it will go to Judicial branch. It’s going to be very hard to claim the tax returns are “essential to the justice of the case” without already knowing they prove something specific. No court is going to authorize a fishing expedition.
Let’s further consider that even if a House committee gets their hands on them, per that same law cited above they can only be viewed in closed door executive session, and the information may not be shared with anyone outside of. So, the entire point in attempting to show them to all their Democratic voters would be meaningless, and any leaks would be a federal felony. Since this would be a small group viewing the tax returns, it would be pretty easy to figure out who did it.
Further, they should be careful in playing this game, because, get this: section (g) gives the “President and certain persons” the power to demand the tax returns of citizens in the same way. Do nutters like Maxine Waters, Adam Schiff, and others want Trump looking at their returns?
